It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Can Hillary pull off the nomination?!?

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 7 2008 @ 09:24 PM
It seemed as if Obama getting the Democratic nomination was a done deal. It seemed as if his elegant speeches and charisma made him impossible to compete with. It seemed as if Obama could do no wrong and no one could get enough of him. It seemed as if the Presidency was being handed to him on a silver platter, largely because of the positive media hype that seemed to follow his every move ...

But things aren't always as they seem ....

People are now suffering from "Obama Fatigue". They are tired of seeing him on TV every time they turn it on. Tired of constantly hearing his name and endless stories about his every move.

And people are realizing that maybe having 'fresh blood' with no experience may bring change but is it really a positive change and do they really want to take that kind of risk?

Hillary has some diehard supporters that will not give up on her becomming the democratic nominee. They are loud and determined and the tide seems to be turning to help them in their arguement that Obama cannot guarantee a win for the Democratic party come November.

What are your thoughts on the possibility of Hillary walking away from the convention as the Democratic Nominee? What kind of backlash would that have? What would happen to the Democratic party if that happened? What will happen to the Democratic party if it DOESN'T happy? Will the diehard Hillary supporters eventually calm down and vote for Obama or will they leave the party as they are threatening to do?

I'm interested to hear the different scenarios that are running through people's minds.


posted on Aug, 7 2008 @ 09:42 PM
The chances that Hillary will find a way to secure the nomination are slim. You'd see a full scale revolt against the Democratic party by the Obama supporters if that happened and they might leave the party permanently. I definitely don't believe that the Clintons themselves have given up, however. Not even close. They always, ALWAYS have a backup plan. Given their silence since the big 'party unity' speech several weeks ago, I think they have something up their sleeve for the convention. Whatever it is, it probably won't work (unless its a huge Obama scandal they've been sitting on), so my guess is that Hillary is now setting her sights primarily on 2012.

As for the Hillary supporters still holding out, no, it is highly unlikely that they'll ever support Obama if they're not doing so already. The ones I know personally can't stand him. I've seen similar statements from many others on various message boards on the internet. However, I suspect that they will eventually return to the Democratic party, most likely in time for the next election cycle. But this time? No, I definitely don't believe they will.

posted on Aug, 8 2008 @ 09:13 AM
I agree that the Clinton's have been unusually quiet and it makes me believe that they do have something up their sleeve. It would be very interesting if they exposed something about Obama that put him out of the running.

If Obama wins, 2012 for Hillary isn't likely, so this might be her only shot. Though people are undoubtedly feeling 'Obama Fatigue', probably an equal number of people have had enough of the Clinton's and couldn't tolerate another Clinton in the White House.

With all of those people out there that are still pushing for Hillary, I think it will be an interesting convention no matter what the outcome.


posted on Aug, 8 2008 @ 09:39 AM
reply to post by Jemison

I concede, it WOULD be in typical Clinton fashion to completely destroy your own reputation because you can't keep it in your pants....wait....wrong reference...

because you can't concede defeat.

Hillary could make a move for the nomination - but the democratic party has already announced its decision (i think?) and hillary announced her resignation.

If the democratic party wants to secure defeat - they could allow Clinton to steal the nomination from Obama after Obama won it fair and square.

Even AFTER operation chaos which seeked to muster support for clinton from republicans (who failed miserably anyways, and Obama won regardless)

Hillary couldnt win a fixed nomination.

Do you know how bad that'd bode on her come Sept/Oct/Nov if she were the nominee??

McCain could beat her with his eyes closed.

posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 02:21 PM
The press is reporting today that Edwards may have cost Hillary the primary! If his affair had been uncovered prior to the primaries or early in the primaries, Hillary likely would have been the Democratic nominee!

This Edwards affair may give Hillary yet another boost in her (or her supporters) ability to interfere with the democratic nominee!!!

Any thoughts?


posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 02:34 PM
Here is a link discussing how Edwards cost Clinton the nomination:

Here is a quote from the link:

Sen. Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic presidential nominee if John Edwards had been caught in his lie about an extramarital affair and forced out of the race last year, insists a top Clinton campaign aide, making a charge that could exacerbate previously existing tensions between the camps of Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.
"I believe we would have won Iowa, and Clinton today would therefore have been the nominee," former Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson told

Clinton finished third in the Iowa caucuses barely behind Edwards in second place and Obama in first. The momentum of the insurgent Obama campaign beating two better-known candidates -- not to mention an African-American winning in such an overwhelmingly white state -- changed the dynamics of the race forever.

Interesting ...


posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 07:22 PM
Seriously Jemison, get over it.

Hillary lost the primaries, Obama won.

-Despite her years of preperation prior to her candidacy for president, she lost.
-Despite the money her campaign started out with, she lost.
-Despite her Washington connections, she lost.
-Despite her name recognition around the nation and most probably the world, she lost.
-Despite her die hard supporter base, she lost.
-Despite her winning California and New York, she lost.
-Despite her supposed enevitability to become POTUS in the media and in public, she lost.

She conceeded to loosing to Obama. She declared that she would now throw her support around Obama, and whether she as lying about it or not, she said it and this is enough to be used against her if she were to try her luck.

This is political suicide for Hillary and her supporters, if she tries anything at the conventio, she will split the party apart and she will be forever seen as the one who did this. She will not gain support from Obama voters for the decade to come, probably more, if she were to pull off such a stunt she will never have a chance to run for POTUS again with such a weight on her back.

Even in the remote case that she is successful, she will not win the general election and there are numerous reasons that I can say as to why.

-The republicans will use this situation against her.
-There is plenty of dirt, actual dirt with actual evidence, not speculation, but evidence about her and Bill that would be used against her, this is partly why she lost the nomination.
-She will not be able to distinguish herself from the old Washington guard because she is one of them.
-Another clinton in office will mark a 24-28year Bush/Clinton administration, hardly the voice of change.
-She voted for the Iraq war, she will be put down for this.
-She has a better chance making a deal with Obama to take the nomination in 2012.

Hill supporters are stubborn and ignorant, I dont care howmuch of the voting block you take out of the democrats.

Most Hill supporters are Reagan democrats, they have a habit of turning against their own party and for stupid reasons other than the vote for Reagan. Hill supporters were key in helping GH bush into office, Reagan democrats tipped the scale back in 2004 to vote for GW Bush, this is why the democrats lost ohio, virginia, florida and Colorado, Reagan Democrat states.

If Hill supporters wanna go behind McCain, you'll be doing exactly what the neocons want you to do, its your choice to help Bush run free under McSame, its your choice to continue this pointless war thats costing $200 mill a day, its you choice to live for another 8years under the religious right. I however will make the choice to vote in Obama because I dont want any of the above. I would have done the same for Hillary had she won the nomination. If you want to let your own personal BS get in the way of voting for who best fits your interest, not your ego, then I feel very sorry for you.

Hillary lost, Get over it. You want to blame somebody, blame Hillary and her campaign.

[edit on 11-8-2008 by southern_Guardian]

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 01:39 PM
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

The purpose of Operation Chaos wasn't to get Hilary to win the nomination but rather to "bloody up" Obama so he wouldn't look as perfect as he did during the primaries. The only way to accomplish this was to have Republicans vote in the Democrat primaries for Clinton so that the primary process could run it's full course, as it did.


posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 03:52 PM
If Hillary wins the nomination, McCain will win the Presidency.

The question that plagues me is this:

Would there really be a difference in "leadership" between Obama, Clinton, or McCain?

Even if it comes to Obama and McCain slugging it out, aren't they two sides of the same worthless coin?

[edit on 12-8-2008 by Symbiote]

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 08:50 AM

Seriously Jemison, get over it.

I think I should clarify - I am NOT a Hillary supporter, never have been, never will be. I'm supporting McCain (and hoping he'll choose Romney as his VP!).

My reason for asking for input from others was simply because I have heard so many pro Hillary people on the news demanding that she be treated fairly and threatening to disrupt the convention so I was wondering what people on ATS thought.

As we get closer to the convention it seems that Hillary supporters are not going away and are just getting louder and louder AND seem to be getting more ammunition!

It's going to be interesting to see what transpires.


posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 08:57 AM

Would there really be a difference in "leadership" between Obama, Clinton, or McCain?

I don't know if there would be a noticable difference between an Obama and Clinton Presidency but the difference between Obama and McCain running our Country would be like night and day.

What makes you think that there wouldn't be a difference between McCain and Obama? You must see similarities that I don't so I'm curious to read your thoughts on how there wouldn't be any significant differences between the two.


posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 10:46 AM
reply to post by Jemison

Good thread, Jemison. One thing that could cause major headaches for Obama would be if the "Whitey Tapes" happen to surface.

I agree with the point that there are some Hillary supporters that would never cast a vote for Obama, regardless of any harm the party may suffer because of it. They despise him that much.

As for Edwards costing Hillary the election, well, I don't know. Supposedly he had the affair as early as 2006. Certainly the Clinton bloodhounds picked up on it. Why didn't they use the info earlier? The only reason I can think of is the love child hadn't been born yet...

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 11:54 AM

Supposedly he had the affair as early as 2006. Certainly the Clinton bloodhounds picked up on it. Why didn't they use the info earlier? The only reason I can think of is the love child hadn't been born yet...

One would think that the Clinton camp HAD to have known about the affair. Maybe it was their belief that Edwards wasn't a real threat during the primaries? Or, maybe they just didn't want to be the ones exposing Edwards for the dirtbag he is out of respect for Edwards cancer-striken wife? LOL, wait, the Clinton's don't care about anyone but themselves so I don't think it was sympathy for Elizabeth Edwards that prompted them to keep their mouths shut.

Edwards remaining in the primary probably didn't hurt Clinton at all but it's just another situation that the pro-Clinton people can twist to try to get people to believe that Obama has stolen the nomination from Clinton.

I still believe that up until, and during, the convention, more situations will arise that help rasie sympathy toward Clinton having the nomination snatched from her.


posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 03:59 PM
reply to post by Jemison

Edwards remaining in the primary probably didn't hurt Clinton at all but it's just another situation that the pro-Clinton people can twist to try to get people to believe that Obama has stolen the nomination from Clinton.

Oh, I have to disagree with that. Edwards definitely split the vote in the early caucuses and primaries. Just look at the Iowa delegates:

Obama 940
Edwards 744
Clinton 737

If Edwards hadn't been in the race, who knows where the race would be today?

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 08:35 PM
Another 'win' for the Clinton supporters. Obama agrees to have Clinton's name put in the nomination at DNC. Dick Morris is on Fox news saying that it was weak of Obama to allow this and that it is now turning in to "Clinton's Convention". Not that he thinks she'll win, but it's going to be her name out there everywhere.

The public will see almost two full nights of the Clinton's speeches during the Convention. That could hurt Obama, and I agree, it does make Obama look weak. I don't think he really had a choice in the matter if he wanted a real shot at getting the Clinton votes come November, but still, I don't think it's going to help him as much as it will hurt him.

Once again, I can't help but wonder, can Hillary pull off getting the democratic nomination?!?!?!?


new topics

top topics


log in